The matter concerning waqf disputes must be resolved through the Waqf Tribunal, not under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Anil K. Narendran, J.

Vakkom Padinjare Muslim Jama-ath, the 1^st petitioner herein, is a Waqf registered with the 1^st respondent Kerala State Waqf Board. The 2^nd petitioner is the Mutawalli of that Waqf and petitioners 3 and 4 are the General Secretary and Treasurer, respectively, of the Managing Committee of that Waqf. The petitioners have filed this writ petition, invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P7 show cause notice dated 10.01.2025 issued by the 1^st respondent Kerala State Wakf Board through its Divisional Waqf Officer, whereby respondents 2 and 3 are required to show cause why prosecution steps shall not be taken for recovering a sum of Rs.5,45,000/- towards the loss sustained to the 1^st petitioner Waqf, as per audit report certification dated 11.04.2022 of the Empanelled Auditors, referred to therein; and a writ of mandamus commanding the 1^st respondent State Waqf Board to enforce Exts.P1 to P4 notices dated 20.04.2022, 25.05.2022, 25.06.2022 and 08.03.2023 respectively, Ext.P5 judgment dated 25.10.2024 in W.P.(C)No.37043 of 2024 and Ext.P6 judgment dated 15.09.2025 in W.P.(C)No.32164 of 2025 of this Court, in letter and spirit, within a time limit prescribed by this Court.

2. This writ petition is one filed on 27.01.2026. Along with I.A.No.1 of 2026, which was filed on 30.01.2026, the petitioners have placed on record Ext.P9 show cause notice dated 12.09.2025, which is one issued by the 1^st respondent State Waqf Board, through its Divisional Waqf Officer, whereby respondents 2 and 3 are directed to show cause why prosecution steps shall not be taken for recovering a sum of Rs.2,45,000/- towards the loss sustained to the 1^st petitioner Waqf, as per the audit report remarks dated 23.04.2025 of the Empanelled Auditors, referred to therein. A reading of Ext.P9 would show that on receipt of Ext.P7 show cause notice dated 10.01.2025, respondents 2 and 3 submitted a reply dated 03.02.2025, along with records. Thereafter, the Empanelled Auditors submitted the audit report remarks dated 23.04.2025, based on which the 1^st respondent State Waqf Board, through the Divisional Waqf Officer, issued Ext.P9 show cause notice to respondents 2 and 3.

3. Heard arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for Kerala State Waqf Board for the 1^st respondent.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that in view of the undertaking given before this Court by the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Waqf Board, which was taken note of by the Division Bench in Ext.P5 judgment dated 25.10.2024 in W.P.(C)No.37043 of 2024, the 1^st respondent State Waqf Board was not justified in reducing the loss caused to the 1^st petitioner Jama-ath from Rs.5,45,000/- to Rs.2,45,000/-, while issuing Ext.P9 show cause notice dated 12.09.2025.

5. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for the State Waqf Board would submit that, in Ext.P5 judgment dated 25.10.2024 in W.P.(C)No.37043 of 2024, the Division Bench of this Court has only recorded the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the Board that the explanation offered by the defaulters, i.e., respondents 2 and 3 herein, has already been received and found to be not satisfactory and that, the Board has already taken a decision to initiate prosecution proceedings in accordance with law. After Ext.P5 judgment, the 1^st respondent Waqf Board issued a notice dated 10.01.2025 to respondents 2 and 3. They submitted a reply dated 03.02.2025, along with records. That was considered by the Empanelled Auditors, who submitted the audit report re